TORY MPs have backed “racist and authoritarian” immigration legislation which could result in Ukrainian refugees being jailed when they arrive in the UK.
The Nationality and Borders Bill makes it a criminal offence to knowingly arrive in the UK without permission rather than via a designated scheme or route, with a maximum sentence of four years in prison.
Opposition MPs warned such a measure could result in Ukrainians being prosecuted if they do not arrive through official schemes and “without the right papers”.
But those concerns were dismissed by the Conservative government, with five Scottish Tory MPs also backing the proposals. Their leader Douglas Ross did not record a vote.
The new immigration rules would also mean the UK Government could strip people of their British citizenship without warning.
Ahead of the Commons vote, Scottish Greens external affairs spokesperson Ross Greer said: “This racist and authoritarian Bill could not be coming at a worse time. The Westminster government is sending warm words of solidarity to Ukrainians fleeing war with one breath while punishing and criminalising refugees with the next."
Peers had voted to remove the new offence that punishes those who arrive in the UK without a valid entry clearance, but MPs reinstated the measure by 317 votes to 220 – majority 97.
MPs also voted 318 to 220, majority 98, to reinstate a proposal to treat asylum seekers differently based on how they enter the UK.
The Government has argued the planned differentiation in the treatment of asylum seekers, depending on how they arrived in the country, is aimed at discouraging people from travelling to the UK other than by safe and legal routes, given the continuing problem of English Channel crossings.
LibDem MP Tim Farron said the UK is willing to accept Ukrainians who have relatives in the UK or are sponsored, but asked: “What if somebody from Ukraine just turns up?
“Will they be removed to a safe country that they have come from? Will they be removed to a third country to apply from? What will we do for those Ukrainians who flee from the murderous despot Putin and come here via the irregular routes? Do they have to come on an inflatable?”
READ MORE: Scottish Parliament refuses consent for Priti Patel’s 'repugnant' new borders bill
Home Office minister Tom Pursglove replied: “There is absolutely no reason why any Ukrainian should be paying an evil people smuggler to come to the United Kingdom to be in safety.
“We have these two generous schemes that I have set out the detail of, which are uncapped and wide in capturing the many and varied circumstances that people gave.
“What I would not want anybody to do — this applies with any group — is to put their life in the hands of those evil criminal gangs who have only one regard, which is to turn a profit, putting those individuals in great danger.
“We have had many debates about the nature and construction of the Ukrainian scheme and I am confident that there is no reason why people should resort to that means of travelling to the United Kingdom. Nobody should encourage Ukrainians, or anybody else for that matter, to make those perilous journeys.”
Labour’s shadow home secretary Yvette Cooper, in a statement after the votes, said: “Today, Tory MPs voted to make it a criminal offence for Ukrainian families to arrive in the UK without the right papers, with a penalty of up to four years in prison.
“At a time when the British people have made clear that we need to help Ukrainian refugees, this is deeply shameful.”
Greer added: “This is a government already housing asylum seekers in prison-like conditions and sending deportation vans into our communities to carry out dawn raids. Their Bill will make a terrible situation even worse. It would force even greater restrictions on vulnerable people and make it easier for the Home Office to deport refugees back to the conflict zones they have fled from."
“One of the many reasons I support Scotland’s independence is the opportunity to build a humane and welcoming refugee system, one which extends a hand of friendship and genuine solidarity to people around the world. It’s clear the UK is headed in the opposite direction from those aspirations.”
The Bill includes clauses to allow the UK to send asylum seekers to a “safe third country” and to submit claims at a “designated place” determined by the secretary of state.
Officials believe the Bill gives the potential for offshore processing centres to be set up overseas, akin to policies used in Australia.
MPs also voted to reinstate proposals to allow the Government to strip people of their British citizenship without notice.
MPs voted 302 to 232, majority 70, to reinstate this measure after it was rejected by peers.
The division list showed three Conservative MPs – former ministers David Davis and Andrew Mitchell, plus Simon Hoare – rebelled to oppose reviving this proposal.
Bella Sankey, director of Detention Action, said in a statement: “These new laws will effectively segregate refugees by race and nationality. Black and brown people fleeing war and persecution will be the ones predominantly forced into cruel detention camps on remote islands, at an alarming human and financial cost.
“Now the House of Lords must save what they can from the rubble and ensure that the most vulnerable people seeking asylum in the UK, including children and pregnant women, will not be persecuted by this Bill.”
MPs also voted to reinstate proposals to allow the Government to strip people of their British citizenship without notice.
Peers had voted to remove the clause from the Bill, but the Commons voted 318 to 223, majority 95, to disagree with the Lords.
MPs went on to approve Government amendments to reword this section of the Bill in a bid to ease concerns over how the power could be used.
The Commons also voted against a Lords amendment which sought to guarantee the UK takes in at least 10,000 refugees a year.
The division list showed seven Tory MPs rebelled to try to retain this measure but it was rejected by 313 votes to 227, majority 86.
The Bill will return to the Lords for further consideration.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel